For all the DHB and Walden haters

[Superman]

You know I respect your opinion on football matters. But you haven't been around much, so maybe you're out of practice. Or getting old... ;)

 

1).  I stated that play is what made me take notice of Walden, I did not mean to imply that was his fault.

2) Walden most certainly gives up the edge because he's a non factor in the play.

1) Noted.

2) No sir. First of all, Walden made the tackle, so how was he a non factor? What happened is that Redding got pushed back, which made it hard on Sheppard to get to the spot, so Walden had to slide back to the inside. He shed the blocker and wrapped the ball carrier up, after setting the edge quite nicely. This was at 13:45 in the first quarter, in case you want to review again.

3)  His pursuit on that play was good but two points, one the RB got outside of Walden which is not supposed to happen and two Walden in pursuit would not have made the tackle to stop the 1st down had Bethea not force the RB to hesitate and come back towards the inside.

You're being overly restrictive when it comes to "setting the edge." If the back decides to go around the edge, despite the fact that the backer is cutting it off, it's to the defense's benefit, because the back takes longer to get vertical.

Walden could have pushed the tight end back a little further, in which case the back would have been stoned in the backfield by Sheppard. So maybe I'll drop his grade down to a B on that play. But when you force the back to go wide around the outside, you've done your job well. Add to that the way he shed the blocker -- again -- to make the tackle, and he was solid on that play. You're right that Walden wouldn't have made the tackle if not for his teammates, but the opposite is true as well. Walden's impact on that play is unmistakable.

4).  I will have to watch that one again because I don't remember Walden chasing from the other side, I remember him turning around and chasing after the play bounced around him.

 

5)  I consider it bad when he doesn't get off his block until the runner is by him.

4) The play went away from Walden. Check it out. 9:11 in the first, 3rd and 1. Walden lines up strongside, they motion the tight end to the other side of the field, then toss it that way. Walden was halfway between the hash and the numbers on the opposite side of the field when the ball was snapped. The play didn't bounce around him.

5) Meh. You're being overly critical. He wasn't great on that play, obviously. But we had him basically playing nickel, five yards off the line. Again, he could have come harder down the line, but I believe he had coverage responsibilities first, and it very well could have been play action. If he had come crashing down, he'd have put himself in terrible position to cover his man. So him shedding the block just about where he was engaged and giving chase was good effort, and he met Bethea at the ball. More credit to Bethea for getting to the ball carrier, but Walden wasn't bad on this play.

As far as rushing the passer, I didn't see him do it often but the sack look nice other than that he was pretty pedestrian, he has no moves if he doesn't beat the guy with the inital step.  But I also don't think he was brought to the Colts for his pass rushing ability, so anything the Colts get in that department is a bonus.

I agree. He has no moves. On his sack, it was a poor protection scheme and poor awareness by Diehl and Manning, who ran right into the pressure. Not taking away from Walden; he did what he was supposed to do, and used his hands well to keep Diehl off of him. But he's not a good pass rusher.

I can give other examples as well but he did not play well last night (I'm not the one that said he was abused in the run game).  The starting LBers as a whole did not play well and I wish I could say... the LBers played poorly but Walden did his job but he just didn't hold his ground enough and was a non factor in too many plays that were on his side.

No, you didn't say he was abused. But he wasn't abused. And I don't think he was a non factor in any of the plays that came his way. I think he did an above average job on the plays that came his way, and I think he did an excellent job pursuing plays that went the other way.

I'm really kind of surprised that people are suggesting he didn't play well. I thought he and the other outside backers were just fine, for the most part. Werner struggled early, but settled in and did better as the game went on. Mathis did a good job. The inside backers weren't great, but they also made some plays.

[Coffeedrinker]

You know I respect your opinion on football matters. But you haven't been around much, so maybe you're out of practice. Or getting old... ;)

 

1) Noted.

2) No sir. First of all, Walden made the tackle, so how was he a non factor? What happened is that Redding got pushed back, which made it hard on Sheppard to get to the spot, so Walden had to slide back to the inside. He shed the blocker and wrapped the ball carrier up, after setting the edge quite nicely. This was at 13:45 in the first quarter, in case you want to review again.

You're being overly restrictive when it comes to "setting the edge." If the back decides to go around the edge, despite the fact that the backer is cutting it off, it's to the defense's benefit, because the back takes longer to get vertical.

Walden could have pushed the tight end back a little further, in which case the back would have been stoned in the backfield by Sheppard. So maybe I'll drop his grade down to a B on that play. But when you force the back to go wide around the outside, you've done your job well. Add to that the way he shed the blocker -- again -- to make the tackle, and he was solid on that play. You're right that Walden wouldn't have made the tackle if not for his teammates, but the opposite is true as well. Walden's impact on that play is unmistakable.

4) The play went away from Walden. Check it out. 9:11 in the first, 3rd and 1. Walden lines up strongside, they motion the tight end to the other side of the field, then toss it that way. Walden was halfway between the hash and the numbers on the opposite side of the field when the ball was snapped. The play didn't bounce around him.

5) Meh. You're being overly critical. He wasn't great on that play, obviously. But we had him basically playing nickel, five yards off the line. Again, he could have come harder down the line, but I believe he had coverage responsibilities first, and it very well could have been play action. If he had come crashing down, he'd have put himself in terrible position to cover his man. So him shedding the block just about where he was engaged and giving chase was good effort, and he met Bethea at the ball. More credit to Bethea for getting to the ball carrier, but Walden wasn't bad on this play.

I agree. He has no moves. On his sack, it was a poor protection scheme and poor awareness by Diehl and Manning, who ran right into the pressure. Not taking away from Walden; he did what he was supposed to do, and used his hands well to keep Diehl off of him. But he's not a good pass rusher.

No, you didn't say he was abused. But he wasn't abused. And I don't think he was a non factor in any of the plays that came his way. I think he did an above average job on the plays that came his way, and I think he did an excellent job pursuing plays that went the other way.

I'm really kind of surprised that people are suggesting he didn't play well. I thought he and the other outside backers were just fine, for the most part. Werner struggled early, but settled in and did better as the game went on. Mathis did a good job. The inside backers weren't great, but they also made some plays.

I am definitely getting old... too old to argue with you young whippersnappers.  I won't respond to everything or else we will be writing books soon (fiction in your case... that's for the old remark).

 

2).  It was the play immediately after the PI not two plays later, and I don't consider piling on after to be "making the tackle".  It was a good play by Howell on a short field.

 

4) I will watch the other play again when I get a chance.  I no longer work from a home office so my chance to review some of these things is limited.

 

My thoughts on him not playing well stem from watching him get pushed around more times than not.  Not setting the edge.  Part of it is because I think he was responsible for the 8 yard gain on 3rd down.  If that is not the case, then I may upgrade him from bad to mediocre but there were still times when the Giants went right at him and gained good positive yards and it's not always the fault of another player.

[Superman]

I am definitely getting old... too old to argue with you young whippersnappers.  I won't respond to everything or else we will be writing books soon (fiction in your case... that's for the old remark).

Touche.

 

2).  It was the play immediately after the PI not two plays later, and I don't consider piling on after to be "making the tackle".  It was a good play by Howell on a short field.

I gave the time of the play I'm talking about. Maybe we're talking about two different plays.

 

4) I will watch the other play again when I get a chance.  I no longer work from a home office so my chance to review some of these things is limited.

 

My thoughts on him not playing well stem from watching him get pushed around more times than not.  Not setting the edge.  Part of it is because I think he was responsible for the 8 yard gain on 3rd down.  If that is not the case, then I may upgrade him from bad to mediocre but there were still times when the Giants went right at him and gained good positive yards and it's not always the fault of another player.

 

Here's the 8 yard gain, just in case you happen to get back here and take a look:

 

http://forums.colts.com/gallery/album/302-walden-vs-giants/

(The images are all posting extra large for some reason, so I'm just linking to the gallery.)

 

1) You can see Walden lined up on the near side, outside of the hash.

 

2) Now that the tight end has motioned to the far side, the play goes to the far side, away from Walden. You can see that Werner and Mathis have been pushed off the ball, and we have zero outside contain, with Conner and Sheppard trying to get to the outside. But there are about three clean blue shirts that will be waiting for them.

 

3) Here you can see the carnage. The red X stands for all the kills the Giants scored on that play. Walden gets over and pushes the back out of bounds. This play clearly didn't go Walden's direction.

 

I just didn't see him getting pushed around, nor did I see the Giants going right at him and gaining good positive yards. We've pointed out a couple of plays where he was less than perfect, but like I said, I think you're being overly critical. 

 

Edited August 19, 2013 by Superman

[Coffeedrinker]

 

Touche.

 

I gave the time of the play I'm talking about. Maybe we're talking about two different plays.

 

 

Here's the 8 yard gain, just in case you happen to get back here and take a look:

 

 

(The images are all posting extra large for some reason, so I'm just linking to the gallery.)

 

1) You can see Walden lined up on the near side, outside of the hash.

 

2) Now that the tight end has motioned to the far side, the play goes to the far side, away from Walden. You can see that Werner and Mathis have been pushed off the ball, and we have zero outside contain, with Conner and Sheppard trying to get to the outside. But there are about three clean blue shirts that will be waiting for them.

 

3) Here you can see the carnage. The red X stands for all the kills the Giants scored on that play. Walden gets over and pushes the back out of bounds. This play clearly didn't go Walden's direction.

 

I just didn't see him getting pushed around, nor did I see the Giants going right at him and gaining good positive yards. We've pointed out a couple of plays where he was less than perfect, but like I said, I think you're being overly critical. 

 

 

Thanks for the screen shots... the play of which I accused Walden of blowing did not go to his side and the 1st down was not a result of poor play on Walden's part.

 

I will upgrade my assessment of his play to mediocre.

[Superman]

Thanks for the screen shots... the play of which I accused Walden of blowing did not go to his side and the 1st down was not a result of poor play on Walden's part.

 

I will upgrade my assessment of his play to mediocre.

 

[jvan1973]

Thanks for the screen shots... the play of which I accused Walden of blowing did not go to his side and the 1st down was not a result of poor play on Walden's part.

I will upgrade my assessment of his play to mediocre.

I'm sure Grigson and Pagano are relieved that you upgraded your assessment.

[Coffeedrinker]

I'm sure Grigson and Pagano are relieved that you upgraded your assessment.

I just got a text from both of them.  Too bad I can't share what they texted.

[Superman]

I was under the impression a majority didn't like Waldens contract. Not Walden.

 

There were plenty of people here and elsewhere on the Internet claiming "Walden is the worst OLB in the league, what a terrible signing!" Mostly based on a PFF rating, very little based on actual observation of his play. (Never mind that the PFF rating didn't classify him as worst in the league; it was based on one edge defender rating, which is slanted toward good pass rushers, and the list was specific to free agent players.)

Now, I find it ironic that Walden get's a positive PFF rating for yesterday's game, but the people who normally advocate PFF are talking about how bad Walden was. That's a head scratcher.

On top of that, Walden's contract was initially misreported. First impressions ruled the day. It's basically a one year, $4m contract, with a team option moving forward. For a Sam backer in a 3-4 defense, $4m/year is decent.

[NewEra]

He looked real good to my untrained eye. Was darn pleased with Werner also. I think getting Landry back will help with the run and pass defense big time. Our new eraser?

[Superman]

He looked real good to my untrained eye. Was darn pleased with Werner also. I think getting Landry back will help with the run and pass defense big time. Our new eraser?

We certainly missed a lot of open field tackles. If Landry can improve on that, it will be a great success.

[jamesie jr]

Still not sold on DHB but thats mainly because i really like T Y Hilton, his hands weren't as bad as everyone was making them out to be.

 

Plus Walden was a beast!

[John Dee]

Fleener, DHB, Hilton...      Allen's injury..j

 

The facts are this..  Indy WR/TE's last season dropped A LOT of BALLS ..   all of them.    Well Avery for DHB.   

 

They are young., it will happen.

 

 
There were plenty of people here and elsewhere on the Internet claiming "Walden is the worst OLB in the league, what a terrible signing!" Mostly based on a PFF rating, very little based on actual observation of his play. (Never mind that the PFF rating didn't classify him as worst in the league; it was based on one edge defender rating, which is slanted toward good pass rushers, and the list was specific to free agent players.)

Now, I find it ironic that Walden get's a positive PFF rating for yesterday's game, but the people who normally advocate PFF are talking about how bad Walden was. That's a head scratcher.

On top of that, Walden's contract was initially misreported. First impressions ruled the day. It's basically a one year, $4m contract, with a team option moving forward. For a Sam backer in a 3-4 defense, $4m/year is decent.

  I really do like how you and GC articulate your thoughts.   

 

I have a * is accounting but I cannot express "MY" line of thinking on a computer worth a dang..        

 

Very well said.

 

Rock On ...  Go Colts.

 

I'm no Hunter S Thompson... 

Still not sold on DHB but thats mainly because i really like T Y Hilton, his hands weren't as bad as everyone was making them out to be.

 

Plus Walden was a beast!

[Gavin]

Both players looked pretty good at times. Im expecting good but not great things from both players

[BlueShoe]

How does the crow taste this morning. Seriously though, they both looked very good. Agreed?

 

Both impressed me last night. Walden does exactly what Pagano said he would - He sets the edge. DHB fought for extra yards after the catch. I was pleased with both performances. 

[sreylas937]

I am not gonna believe DHB changed his ways after 3 catches in a preseason game... He is suppose to be a speeder, lets see what he does on a 50 yard bomb over the top, weather he catches it or drops it last he has been proven to do...

[BrentMc11]

I am sure that you will let me know if I'm wrong and if I am I will proudly admit it.  because I am just going by what I thought I saw during the game the last.

I won't have time until next week  

 

We have fans on both sides of the ball here, so it is safe to say we all did not see it the same way. (DHB and Walden) I saw the game so much better in person last week and could analyze better.  TV angles just do not do it justice.

 

I like reading your opinions, so I do not want burn this one bridge.  I think one thing we can all agree upon in this thread:  If both play like Coach Pagano and Ryan Grigson envisioned, the Colts could be a scary football team to play.  With Mr. Luck....I feel we already are !!           :pass:  :pass: !!!!!

[BrentMc11]

Kevin Bowen just posted this as one of the articles..."pagano gets defiant about the defense.."  He definitely liked what he saw....and especially in the Redzone.

 

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/colts-avoid-key-injuries-defense-steals-show

 

Another article in today's Star......Wondering aloud if Chapman gets the call.....he DEMANDS the double team....and more

 

http://www.indystar.com/article/20130819/SPORTS/308190064/Colts-defense-has-added-players-needed-successful-3-4-scheme

[Kyle]

Actually, I'm not trying hard at all. Stating facts. Multiple years in Oakland he was garbage. I wish I would crown him a good WR after just ONE game. And it was a pre-season game. Like I said, he caught with his body not his hands. It's a long season, we'll see what happens

 

forget about everything in Oakland.  think of him as a rookie we just drafted (Oakland is basically a college team).  if that was true, i think you would be pretty pumped about how he has played and his potential to improve.  i get what you are saying, but you have to at least see where i am coming from.  right?

[ColtsHoosiersBB]

Always supported Walden.

DHB still not sold on. Most his completions came from short routes and quick hitters. We'll see how he does when he gets corner endzone passes like the one Hilton had and other deeper routes

Anyone can catch a 1-5 yard pass, his hands are questionable when it's medium & deep passes

There is gonna be a lot of short passes in Pep's offense so he may be a short pass specialist on this team. I agree that receivers need to be more well rounded though, need more games to make a better assumption on this subject.

[rittdk01]

How does the crow taste this morning. Seriously though, they both looked very good. Agreed?

wait till the REAL games bro.

 

I hope they both look great all season long.

[mintor]

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/sports/ncaaf/sec/story/2012/09/12/nose-tackle-daniel-mccullers-tennessees-big-man-on-campus/57768344/1

 

this a colt in 2014

[mintor]

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/sports/ncaaf/sec/story/2012/09/12/nose-tackle-daniel-mccullers-tennessees-big-man-on-campus/57768344/1

 

this a colt in 2014

Jadeveon Clowney , he a beast at http://sports.yahoo.com/news/clowney-unblockable-qb-shaw-bruised-172553034--ncaaf.html

 

Anthony Barr  is good

[schwamm]

wait till the REAL games bro.

I hope they both look great all season long.

Agree on waiting, but I think the whole eat crow thing stems from people not waiting for games to offer plenty of criticism.

I think it's very odd that some of the same people (not saying you) who bash some players, then use the "wait for a real games" bit, are also inclined to build up guys like Whalen, who has never done anything against real competition outside of practice.

[Gavin]

Agree on waiting, but I think the whole eat crow thing stems from people not waiting for games to offer plenty of criticism.

I think it's very odd that some of the same people (not saying you) who bash some players, then use the "wait for a real games" bit, are also inclined to build up guys like Whalen, who has never done anything against real competition outside of practice.

Keep in mind Whalen was out all of last year except pre season so thats not a fair comparison.......Walden on the other hand has been a starter for a few. I've been impressed with what I have seen from Walden as well as Griff

[schwamm]

Keep in mind Whalen was out all of last year except pre season so thats not a fair comparison.......Walden on the other hand has been a starter for a few. I've been impressed with what I have seen from Walden as well as Griff

I agree it isn't a fair comparison, but for the opposite reason you do.  DHB and Walden have at least proven that they belong in the NFL, and have stuck around for multiple seasons each (not on IR or the PS), despite your previous reviews of their respective games.  We've seen them "prove it" in real games, even if not with the Colts yet. 

 

Whalen, on the other hand, has yet to do anything against anybody outside of practice.  His big preseason performance last year was against guys who weren't close to making the Steelers squad, and this year he failed to get even remotely open against the Bills starters and didn't touch the ball until the scrubs were in.  Yet somehow, people on this forum make him out to be the second coming. 

 

I'm not against Whalen's potential success.  In fact, I think it would be awesome to see him emerge as a long term stud for the Colts.  I just don't understand the disproportionate man crush against the backdrop of all the bashing other guys have received, from you and others, justified or not.  It reminds me of all the times fans have gotten all giddy about some preseason/practice/paper stud only to see them disappear when it counted (Aaron Moorehead, anyone?).

[crazycolt1]

I think all of this is suffering from over analysing. We seemed to be over looking the Giants players and their talent. It is way too early to say one way or another who is going to do anything. 30 or more comments about a player who has played 1 preseason game? I know this forum is a point counter point debate but this subject is not worth this much attention. We have yet to see the slotted starters on both sides of the ball so all this speculation is exactly that, speculation. 

[sreylas937]

I agree it isn't a fair comparison, but for the opposite reason you do.  DHB and Walden have at least proven that they belong in the NFL, and have stuck around for multiple seasons each (not on IR or the PS), despite your previous reviews of their respective games.  We've seen them "prove it" in real games, even if not with the Colts yet. 

 

Whalen, on the other hand, has yet to do anything against anybody outside of practice.  His big preseason performance last year was against guys who weren't close to making the Steelers squad, and this year he failed to get even remotely open against the Bills starters and didn't touch the ball until the scrubs were in.  Yet somehow, people on this forum make him out to be the second coming. 

 

I'm not against Whalen's potential success.  In fact, I think it would be awesome to see him emerge as a long term stud for the Colts.  I just don't understand the disproportionate man crush against the backdrop of all the bashing other guys have received, from you and others, justified or not.  It reminds me of all the times fans have gotten all giddy about some preseason/practice/paper stud only to see them disappear when it counted (Aaron Moorehead, anyone?).

Isn't Oakland basically a PS?

[throwing BBZ]

Who would I call good or say had a good game?  because there is a difference.  Walden may turn out to be good for the Colts... he did nto have a good game, however.

 

Of that list, only Bethea can be called good.

 

But, RJF had a good game, Rayford had a good game, Conner had some good plays and some bad plays, Nevis had a good game.  All the rest were okay to bad.  That doesn't mean they didn't do anything good, just that overall they did not play consistent ball.

 

Sorry Chief looks like Bo don`t know FB.

As the tape shows, Walden didn`t get beat once doing his job. he was Stout.

[Coffeedrinker]

Sorry Chief looks like Bo don`t know FB.

As the tape shows, Walden didn`t get beat once doing his job. he was Stout.

 

 

Well, I'm not bo and I do know football and the tape does not show that at all.  The tape does show that one time when I thought he got beat he didn't but it also shows than he was beat many times during the game.

[Superman]

I think all of this is suffering from over analysing. We seemed to be over looking the Giants players and their talent. It is way too early to say one way or another who is going to do anything. 30 or more comments about a player who has played 1 preseason game? I know this forum is a point counter point debate but this subject is not worth this much attention. We have yet to see the slotted starters on both sides of the ball so all this speculation is exactly that, speculation.

Disagree.

I'm not a coach or a personnel guy, but the people who are are using the performances during these games to figure out who will make the team and what role they will play. When we look at how a player performs in a preseason game, we're really looking at the exact same thing the coaches are looking at, albeit with less information than they have. But it's not speculation to say "this player performed well," or "this player wasn't all that great." It's analysis. And I think it's very relevant at this point.

[Blackhawk4]

Besides the OP pulling a MMQB and gloating what's the point of this thread?

 

I get Whalden not being the most popular signing on the planet and questions on DHB, but it just seems sorta silly to make a thread like this...

[Superman]

Well, I'm not bo and I do know football and the tape does not show that at all.  The tape does show that one time when I thought he got beat he didn't but it also shows than he was beat many times during the game.

 

I still disagree with the bolded, after watching a little bit more. I think Walden had a very good game. There were two or three times that he didn't set the edge quite as hard as we need, and another couple pass rushes when he got pushed out of the play or just plain stoned. He wasn't perfect, but I really don't know what it is about his performance that you think was so bad. I think he played well.

[schwamm]

Disagree.

I'm not a coach or a personnel guy, but the people who are are using the performances during these games to figure out who will make the team and what role they will play. When we look at how a player performs in a preseason game, we're really looking at the exact same thing the coaches are looking at, albeit with less information than they have. But it's not speculation to say "this player performed well," or "this player wasn't all that great." It's analysis. And I think it's very relevant at this point.

I absolutely agree that analysis is relevant, but there are a ton of severely under-qualified "analysts" on this forum throwing speculation and opinion out there as if it were fact.

[Superman]

I absolutely agree that analysis is relevant, but there are a ton of severely under-qualified "analysts" on this forum throwing speculation and opinion out there as if it were fact.

 

Fair point.

[Jason_]

I absolutely agree that analysis is relevant, but there are a ton of severely under-qualified "analysts" on this forum throwing speculation and opinion out there as if it were fact.

 

To be fair, it's not like this is anything new. lol

[crazycolt1]

Disagree.

I'm not a coach or a personnel guy, but the people who are are using the performances during these games to figure out who will make the team and what role they will play. When we look at how a player performs in a preseason game, we're really looking at the exact same thing the coaches are looking at, albeit with less information than they have. But it's not speculation to say "this player performed well," or "this player wasn't all that great." It's analysis. And I think it's very relevant at this point.

I was referring to one individual player getting all this attention and we haven't even seen him play in one game with meaning. I am not an expert in personnel but there seems to be many who think they are. Not even the so called experts can't tell from one preseason game how a player is going to turn out. There have been cases where a certain player shined in preseason but failed come real game time. Some players need some coaching up and game experience to improve. Also sometimes it takes playing past being a rookie to become used to the speed and size of the NFL. Too many fans draw conclusions based on an incomplete time frame. We as Colts fans have witnessed players who fit each of these categories I have mentioned. 

[Balzer40]

I absolutely agree that analysis is relevant, but there are a ton of severely under-qualified "analysts" on this forum throwing speculation and opinion out there as if it were fact.

 

 

W H A ...? You mean a few good youtube clips and nice play in practice doesn't make a player the next great HOFer? Are you telling me, that a rookie thats never played in a real NFL game isn't better than another 3 or 4 yr. player that many feel sucks anyway so the rookie just has to be better even with absolutely no evidence to support that train of thought? You are really making some radical and outrageous claims!

[schwamm]

W H A ...? You mean a few good youtube clips and nice play in practice doesn't make a player the next great HOFer? Are you telling me, that a rookie thats never played in a real NFL game isn't better than another 3 or 4 yr. player that many feel sucks anyway so the rookie just has to be better even with absolutely no evidence to support that train of thought? You are really making some radical and outrageous claims!

I guess it's just me offering an under-qualified analysis of our under-qualified analysts...

[Jay Kirk]

Walden had some big time hate, and I guess if we read these other threads....he still is hated even with the sack and the stuff on 4th and 1.  There is not another LB that can contain like he does on the team (Conner is the closest)....so he is not going anywhere.

 

The PFFs of the world ranked him as "The worst OLB by numbers."  Our forum members decided then he was not a good signing.  Some think he was awful last night.  When I saw Walden he was in position, or had to move 'out of contain' to try and make a play.  And as I have said all along....everyone will get beat...

 

I do not know how many great blocks I made as an OG, but the ones that I got beat on still haunt me

Just wanted to say,I was not on the hate Walden band wagon,Ive said all along I trust Pagano and Grigson.Can they ?Yes.Will they ?Yes,make mistakes,but judging by what ive seen they have a great eye for talent that's just a little below most peoples radar,you don't have to have the name,you just have to have talent and work ethic.Walden is the best we have at setting the edge,just as you say.IMO he plays his butt off

[ÅÐØNϧ 1]

I guess it's just me offering an under-qualified analysis of our under-qualified analysts...

 

Keep up the good work .